


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



DDDD5D23b4b 







.0- 



.^^ .. 




'.'i> 



y 



^ 



^ 



V" 



'^y 



^^^ 



^' 






^ 



v^. 






"^^ 

•<•' 






A'- 



^0^ 



^o. 









^^^e^ 



A'^ 





4 


o 






^ 


V;^ -- 


c 




.\.^^^ 


.? ^' 






-•"^' 






Q I- 



^'^0^ 



■^ju .-'i 






•^^ 






%.*'■ ••/ 



■'b y 



.0' 






Ov-, 



A 






v.' -St 



A^ 






'.><i' 

' ■^'"'X 
^ 



<r-. 



'bv" 






,-^- 












.<^^°- 



.0' 



%' 



-0^ 



■^^' 









-^o. 






^ .\a ??.,:?.% "^ 



-^ 



'^"^^ °$^%^^>■V ^^^^"^■ 



iV^^ 









^•^ 



,0' 









SPEECH 

OF 

HON. PERCY WALKER. 

OF ALABAMA, 



THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION— THE ATTITUDE OF 
TARTIES— THE DUTY OF SOUTHERN MEN. 

DHLIVEREB IN THE 

HOUSE OF llEPEESENTATIVES, AUGrST 6, 1856. 



The Honsc being in Committee of the Whole, Mr. Walkek said : 

Mr. Chairman, much as I disapprove the habit of appropriating 
time which strictly belongs to legitimate legislation for general de- 
bate, merely to allow gentlemen occasion for expressing their peculiar 
views on the great political topics of the day — in bad taste as I esteem 
it — I am, notwithstanding, so placed as to be constrained to follow an 
■example set by others. 

It is ray ]>urpo-se to address th<3 committee, or, to speak more pro- 
perly, to address through this committee my own constituents, in order 
that they can have no doubt as to what my position is, and what my 
intentions are in regard to the political canvass now going on. It may 
have been observed that ■ever since the nomination of Mr. Fillmore 
in February last, in Phikdelphia, I have been silent ; at least, I have 
■abstained from any public expression of my opinions as to the merits 
of this or that candidate for the highest office of the country. This 
has not been from any indifference to the result. 

It has not been from any indisnosition to canvass the claims or ex- 
amine the avowed opinions of the candidates. On the contrary, sir, 
this silence has been forced upon rae by an earnest desire to wait for 
■developments, to observe the movement of jvarties, to see how men 
holding leading positions in this or that party should define tliem- 
selvesj in order that I might take the whole as a guido, as ligiits in 
my own path, thereby insuring to myself at least some certainty that 
the patli 1 should eventually take in this canvass might be a safe and 
a wise one — such a one as a m.an moved by right instincts, mindful 
of his allegiance to the constitution, and hopeful of the perjictuity of 
the Uniun, so long as it shall subserve the great purposes of its crea- 
tion, should take. It is known to many members of this committee 
that in February last I was a delegate to the convention by which Mr. 
Fillmore was nominated for the presidency. 

In April last I addressed a letter to an editor in my own State, and 
that has been the only occasion upon which I have, in any puhlic 
form, alluded to the coming election. That letter was as follows, viz : 



[From the Floreace Gazette] 
LETTER FROM THE HON. PERCY AVALKEE. 

Washington, A2Jril 4, 1S56. 
To the Editor of the Florence Gazntte: 

Sir : Through tlie kindness of a friend, I have this raoraent received 
the foHowing slip, cut from a late number of your paper, and copied, 
as I am informed by you, from the ^'Nashville Banner," viz: 

" Percy Walker, of Alabama, made a speech apainst the introduction of slavery into an 
Amerinui jilafform. He would tell his southern brethrcTi that Pennsylvania would nerer 
sustain a platform with a slavery plank on it. He could tell them that the great North 
■would not stand upon a slavery platform, llie peat North demanded a lestoration of tho 
Missouri compromise, and they would he satit^fied with nothing less than that. If they 
refused admission to the Edie council, they mnsi.on the same ground, throw out! all the 
delegates from the Nc^h,for they all repudiated, the twelfth section." 

The above is published as purporting to have been said by me in 
the late " National American Convention at Pliiladelphia." 

Taking it for granted that there can be no desire, either on your 
part or that of the editor of the " Banner," to do me an intentional 
vsrrono-, I am satisfied that you will allow me roam in your columns 
to declare emphatically that there is not a ivord of truth in the above 
extract. 

I used no such language as is there attributed to me, 

I was one of the committee on credentials, and concurred in the 
viinoriiy report, protesting against the admission of the "Edie dele- 
gates," as they were called, upon the ground that they were appointed 
by the councils that had re/mdiaied the 12th section of the platform 
of June, 1855. After the reading of the reports, Mr. Baldwin, of 
Connecticut, addressed the convention in favor of the majority report, 
which recommended the admission of the '^' Edie delegation." Ho 
contended that the question of slavery should be left out of the plat- 
form; that it was the intention of the North to fight that question in 
the halls of Congress ; that there must be a restoration of the Missouri 
restriction, &e. 

When he concluded, I, at" the request of Mr. Imboden, of Virginia, 
the author of the "minority report," took the floor in support of that 
report. I spoke nearly two hours, reviewing the history of parties 
for several years back, especially in relation to slavery, defending the 
institution as being in no sense an evil, and declaring emphatically 
that tho " southern Americans" ought not, and would not, consent 
to an ignoring of the question of slavery, or \}\q repudiation of the 
12th section. 

It is unnecessary for me to attempt to give even the substance of 
the speech. But no one who heard it considered it otherwise tljan a 
southern-rights speech. As an evidence of this, I may \xd pardoned 
for saying that at its conclusion southern delegates, of the stricte&t 
State-rights school, thanked me for what they were pleased to termi 
my " full and triumphant vindication of the South." 

A short time after I had concluded, and before the convention ad- 
journed over, I left the hall. At a late hour that night I was in- 
formed that the "Edie delegates" had been admitted. That cir- 
cumstance, and the character of the speeches which I was informed 

?. t-^-\L 



had been made by northern members after I had returned to my 
hotel, determined ine to withdraw from the convention^ and I did so 
next morning. 

On the foHowinp^ IMonday a proposition was ofTered by a nortliern 
delegate declaring that the restriction should be restored. This was 
voted doion by a majority of nearly one hundred, several southern 
States not being represented. 

ThivS vote, and the urgent solicitations of southern delegates, in- 
duced me to return to the convention. The propriety of this step I 
shall not now discuss. That I design doing at anotlier time, and 
through a different medium. My reasons tor voting for Mr, Fillmoro' 
in the convention will then be made public. Sufiice it for the present 
to say, that the southern members were assured that he was for main- 
taining all the exifiting Imcs upon the subject of slavery. 

A Avord more, ancl 1 am done. My course in the ensuing presi- 
dential contest Avill be governed by what I conceive to be my duty to 
the South, The indications now are tliat the question of slavery is to 
be the controlling one^ and in that event no southern man can permit 
parly allegiance to stand between him and the solemn duty of co-ope- 
rating with those who most fully recognise his rights and are ready 
to protect his interests. 

«. llespectfuUy, yours, &c., 

PERCY WALKER. 

I propose, in the first place, to account for my presence in that con- 
vention, and for my action there. 

Some months after I had taken my seat upon this floor, I received 
a notice tliat I had been appointed a delegate to that convention by 
the American party of Alabama. 

As an evidence of the spirit and purposes by which the Alabama 
convention was governed, I refer to the following portions of its plat- 
form, viz: 

" 1. Resolved, That, as the iustitution of slavery e.\i.st<;d in the States of the confederacy 
prior to the adoption of the constitution of the United States, and as the viglit to hold 
■slave.; as /)/-f>/wfy was conccdi'd by the frameis of tlie constitution, and fully recoj^nisod 
therein, tlierefure slavery exists independent!}^ of the constitution ; and, as slavery is re- 
cognised and sanctiuned l)y the constitution. Congress, which derives all its powers from 
that instrument, cmnot legislate on the suliject of slavery, except for its protection where 
it legally exists ; that the Territories are the common property of all tlie States, and 
therefore the people of all the States have the right to enter upon and occupy any terri- 
tory with their slaves as well as other property, and are protected by the constitution 
nnd Hag of the country ; that Congress has no right to logi.slat>e sLxvery into nor to 
exclude it from a Territory ; and tlTat neither Congress nor a territorial legislature has 
any right or power to legislate on the sul)jcct, except so far as muy be necessary to protect 
tlie citizens of the Territory in the possession and enjoyment of their slave property. 

" 2. Ilesolvcd, That the power to exclu'le slavery from, or establish it in, a Territory, 
resides exclusively in a convention of the jieople of such Territ(;ry, legally assembled un- 
der the constituliun of the United States, to form a State constitution preparatory to ad- 
«iLs,sI'jn into the Union. In ihat constitution the people of the Territory liave tiie sole 
righ^ and exclusive power to determine for themselves whether slavery shall or shall not 
e.\ist ?n said Territory. 

" .i. Rf-fdvcd, That the opposite of the doctrines imljodied in the two preceding reso- 
lutions, commonly known as ' sviuattcr sovereignty,' is utterly repudiated and condemned 
by this convention as violative of the spirit of the constitution, and an insidious and 
alarming infringement upon the rights Of the slaveiiolding States ; that it is indefensible 
in principle and dangerous in practice as the Wilmot proviso — 'the most monstrous doc- 



trine ever advanced by an American statesman,' and the people of the South ought not 
to, and will not, submit to it. 

"4. liesvlved, That this convention regards a strict adherence to the principles and 
views contained in the foregoing resolutions absolutely essential to the peace and per- 
petuity of the Union, and we do pledge ourselves, one to the other, that wc will affiliate 
with no party, nor support any man for office, under the government of the State or of 
the United Stati.'s, wlu) does not publicly and unequivocally avow the principles of these 
resolutions, without change or abatement. 

" 5. Resolved, That, in view of the increased dangers that threaten the institutions of 
the South, this convention deems it necessary to, and does hereby, rc-endorse and adopt 
the following, known as the ' Georgia platform,' to wit , 'That the State of Alabama, in 
the judgment of this convention, will and ought to resist, even (as a last resort) to a dis- 
ruption of every tie which binds her to the Union, any action of Congress \ipon the sub- 
ject of slavery in the District of Columbia, or in places subject to the jurisdiction of 
Congress, incompatible with the safety, the domestic tranfjuillity, the rights and honor of 
the slaveholding States ; or any act suppressing the slave trade between the slaveholding 
States, or any refusal to admit as a State any Territory applying, because of the existence 
of slaverj' thei-ein ; or any act prohibiting the introductiuu of slaves into the Territories ; 
or any act repealing or materially modifying the laws now in force for the recovery of 
fugitive slaves. ' ' ' 

At the same time that convention pledged itself to carry out the 
following resolution which had been adopted by a convention of the 
same party in November, 1855 : 

"Congress has no power to legislate upon the question of slavery in the States where 
it exists, or to exclude any State from admission into the Union because its constitution 
does, or does not, recognise the institution of slavery, or to abolish slavery in the District 
of Columbia. The fugitive-slave law should be maintained and aigorously enforced. No 
law or regulation shall be attempted by Congress touching the qmstion of slavery in the 
Territories ; but that it shall cease to agitate the question of slavery in any form. We 
regard a strict adherence to the principles and views of this section absolutely essential 
to the peace and perpetuity of the Union ; and we do pledge our-selvea, one to the other, 
that we will affiliate with no party, nor support any man for office, under the government 
of the State or of the United States, who does not publicly and unequivocally avow tlie 
principles of this section, without change or abatement." 

The State convention also expressed the opinioiii that the American 
party should make no nominations for the jjresidency or vice presi- 
dency at the February convention. 

Similar action had been taken by the party in Georgia, and I think 
in some other of the southern States. 

Before the holding of that convention in Philadelphia the national 
council of the American party had assembled there and had taken 
action. I was not a member of that council. It adopted a platform. 
Before I take my seat I propose to discuss it. When the convention 
met, a controversy arose as to the right of delegates from the State of 
Pennsylvania to seats on that floor. What part I took in regard 
to that controversy is shown in my letter above quoted. 

My friends from Tennessee, [Messrs. Zollicoffer and Ready,] who 
were there as delegates, will recollect that I then said that the south- 
ern Americans ought not, and would not, consent to an ignoring of 
the question of slavery, or the repudiation of the 12th section, as 
contained in the June platform of 1855 ; that they would not be 
willing to take any man, however pure and however exalted he might 
be, if, by the action of the convention or council, acting for the party, 
speaking by its authority, and assuming to be the exponent of its 
opinions and views on this great question, that section should be 
stricken from the platform. 1 said that, in that event, the American 



party South would no longer liarraouize witli those members living 
north of ]\Iason and Dixon's line. 

The convention adopted no ])latrorm, nor did it give any formal 
sanction to the one tianied hy the council a few days previously. In- 
deed, the southern members generally denied the authority of the 
council to prescribe any platform, and acted in convention without 
reference to what had been done in the council. 

Before my return to tlie convention, it became manifest that a largo 
majority were in favor of nominating candidates for tlie presidency 
and vice presidency. The more conservative members believed that 
nominations at that time were essential to the interests of the party — 
that delay might possibly add such strength to George Law as to in- 
sure his nomination, and that such a selection would be disastrous. 
Again, it was feared that an adjournment of the convention without 
making nominations would involve the risk of defections in the 
nortliern States, in consequence of the prevalence of anti-slavery 
opinions, 

Mr. Fillmore was put in nomination, and I voted for liim, and for 
the following reasons : He was the least objectionable candidate ])ro- 
posed. He was resi)ected for his prudence and moderation as a public 
man. His administration, without having been at all brilliant, had 
been characterized by fairness and dignity, and, in the main, had 
commanded the approval of the country. He was sujjposed to be able 
to rally to liis support a larger share of the conservative men of the 
North than any of his competitors, and would thereby weaken the 
sectional movement in the free States against the rights and interests 
of the Soutli. I voted for him in my representative capacity as a del- 
egate, feeling confident that the party in Alabama preferred him to 
either of the other candidates voted fi^r. 

It is true that Mr. Fillmore had been a Whig, while my former 
aifinities and connexions were democratic; yet, in joining the Amer- 
ican party, which I believed to be a great reform movement, I laid 
aside all my old party prejudices. 

I had looked to this new movement as one needed by the country, 
as required by a general necessity — as a movement springing* from 
the great masses of the country, who had become tired with tlie mis- 
erable scramble for the spoils, and whose patriotism would preserve 
this Union intact. I voted, therefore, for Mr. Fillmore; but it is , 
known to those who were there that I uniformly said that I would 
support no man who stood upon the platform which had been ado2)ted 
by the council of February, 1850. 

]\Iy friend from Tennessee, [Mr. Zolltcoffeu,] and my friend from 
Mississippi, [Mr. Lake,] who were members of that convention, Avill 
bear me witness that it was generally declared that Mr. Fillmore was 
nominated without reference to this platform, and that many mem- 
bers of the convention denied the power of the council to make the 
platform binding upon the party. 

Well, sir, what followed? Mr. Fillmore returned to this country 
from his European visit. In his letter of jKiceptance, dated at I'aris, 
what does he say? 

After returning his acknowledgments for the honor conferred upon 



him, and expressing his opinion of the patriotic purposes of the party, 
he employs the following language : 

" So estimating tliis party, botli in its present position and future destiny, I freely adopt 
its great leadinpr principlts, as announced in the recent declaration of the national council 
in riiilailelphia, a copy of wliich you were so kind as to enclbso to me, holding them to 
be j\ist and liberal to every true interest of the country, and wisely adapted to the estab- 
lishment and support of an enlightened, safe, and effective American policy, in full ac- 
cord with the ideas and the h()j)es of the fathers of our republic." 

He there unequivocally adopts and endorses the council platform, 
A comparison of that platform with that of June, 1855, will clearly 
show that the relations between Mr. Fillmore and tlie southern mem- 
bers of the convention who had sup])orted him were entirely changed. 
They contended that the 12th section of the June ])latform of 1855 
was still in force and binding upon the party. That section, in its 
essential features, had been repudiated and stricken out by the coun- 
cil, and Mr. Fillmore, in accepting the nomination, plants himself 
on the platform erected by the last council. The I'ith section is as 
follows : 

"XII. The American party, having arisen upon the ruins, and in spite of the opposi- 
tion, of the Whig and Democratic parties, cannot be in any miuiner responsible for the 
obnoxious acts or violated pledges of either. And the systematic agitation of the slavery 
question by those partice having elevated sectional hostility into a positive element of 
political power, and brought our institutions into peril, it has therefore become tlie impe- 
rative duty of the American party to interpose for the purpose of giving peace to the 
country, and perpetuity to the Union. And as experience has shown it impossible to re- 
concile opinions so extreme as those which separate the disputants, and as there can be 
no dislumor in submitting to the best guai'ant<;e of common justice and of future peace, 
we are determined to abide by and maintain the existing lawsupun the subject of slavery, 
as a final and conclusive settlement of that subject, in spirit and in substance. 

"And regarding it tlie highest duty to avow their opinions upon a subject so important, 
in distinct and unequivocal terms, it is hereby declared, as the sense of this National 
Council, that Congress possesses no power, under the constitution, to legislate upon the 
subject of slavery in the States where it does or may exist, or to exclude any State from 
admission into the Union because its constitution does or does not recognise tlie institu- 
tion of slavery as a part of its social system ; and, expressly pretermitting any expression 
of opinion upon the power of Congress to establish or prohibit slavery in any Territory, 
it is the sense of the National Council that Congress ought not to legislate; upon the sub- 
ject of slavOry within the Territories of the United States, and that any interference by 
Congress witli slavery as it exists in the District of Columbia woidd be a vi(dation of the 
spirit and intention of the compact by which the State of Maryland ceded the District to 
the United States, and a breach of tlie national faith." 

It will be seen that this section pledges the party '' to abide by and 
maintain the existing laws upon the subject of slavery as a final and 
conclusive settlement of that subject, in spirit and in substance." 
This, of course, includes that section of the Kansas-Nebraska bill 
which repealed the Missouri restriction of 1820, and also the fugitive- 
slave law. 

The 12th section also declares " that Congress possesses no power, 
under the constitution^ to legislate upon the subject of slavery in the 
States where it does or may exist, or to exclude any State from admis- 
sion into the Union because its constitution does or does not recognise 
the institution of slavery as a part of its social system." 

It also declares " that Congress ought not to legislate upon the sub- 
ject of slavery within the Territories of the United States," &c. 

Well, sir, what is the }ilatform of February 21, 185G, and what 
changes did it make on that of June, 1855 ? 



Here it is: 

Know-No(hing riat/onn of National Council, February, 185C. 

1. An humble acknowledgment of the SupTcine Being who rules the universe for His 
protecting (.mio vouchsafed to our fathers in their successful revolutionary struggle, and 
feitherto nianift'sted to us, their descendants, iu the preservation of tiie liberties, the in- 
<lependence, and tW. union of these States. 

2. The perpetuiition of tlie federal Union as tlie palladium of our civil and religions 
liberties, and the only sure bulwark of American independence. 

3. Aimricatis miiM ride Avierica, and to this end native-Xiovn citizens should be selected for 
all State, federal, and municipal offices, or government employment, in preference to 
naturalized citizens ; ne\t'rthelcss, 

4. I'ersons bom of American parents residing temporarily abroad should be enlilled to 
all tlu' rights of native-born citizens ; but, 

5. No person shall be selected for politiGil station (whether native or foreign birth) who 
recognises any allegiance, or obligation of any description, to any foreign prince, poten- 
tate, or power, or who refuses to recognise the federal and State constitutions (each within 
its sj)here) as i>aramount to all other laws as rules of political action. 

6. The unqualified recognition and maintenimcc of the reserved rights of the several 
States, and the cultivation of liarmony and fraternal good-will between the citizens of 
the several States, ami, to this end, non-interference by (longress with questions apper- 
taining .soh'ly to the individual States, and non-intervention by each State. 

7. The recognition of the right of the native-born and naturalized citizens of the Uni- 
ted States, permanently residing in any 'i'erritory thereof, to frame tlieir constitution and 
laws, and to regulate their domestic and social alTairs in their own mode, subject only to 
the provisions of the federal constitution, with the right of admission into the Union 
whenever tliey have the retiuisit-e population for one representative in Congress : Provided, 
ahvays, that none but those who are citizens of the United States, under the constitution 
and laws thereof, and who have a fixed residence in tiny such Territory, ought to partici- 
pate in the formation of the constitution, or in the enactment of laws for said Territory 
or State. 

8. An enforcement of the principle that no State or Territory can admit otliers than 
native-born citizens to the riglit of suffrage, or of holding political oltice, tmless such per- 
sons sliall have been natiu'alized according to tlie laws of the United States. 

9. A change in the laws of naturalization, making a continued residence of twenty-one 
years, of all not lieretofore provided for, an indispensable requisite for citizensliip iiere- 
after, and excluding all paupers and persons convicted of crime from landing uiiun our 
shores ; but no interference with the vested rights of foreigners. 

10. Opposition to any union between ('hurch and State ; no interference with religions 
faith or worship, and no test oaths for office, except those indicated in the 5th section of 
this platform. 

11. Free and thorough investigation into any and all alleged abuses of public function- 
aries, and a strict economy in public expenditures. 

12. Maintenance and enforcement of all laws, until said laws are declared null and 
void by competent judicial authority. 

13. Opposition to the reckless and unwi.se policy of the present administration in the 
general management of our national affairs, and far more especially as shown in Bcmoving 
•'Americans" (by designation) and conservatives in principle from office, and placing 
foreigners and ultraists in their places ; as shown in truckling subserviency to the stronger 
and insolent and cowardly bravado towards the weaker powers ; as shown in reopening 
sectional agitiition by the repeal of the Missouri compromise ; as sliown in granting to 
unnaturalized foreigners tlie right of sufi'rage in Kansas and Nebraska ; as shown in its 
vacillating course on the Kansas and Nebrask;i ([uestion ; as sho\\n in the removal of 
Judge Bronson from the collectorship of New York, upon false and unteniible grounds ; as 
shown in the corruptions which pervade some of the departments of the government ; as 
shown in disgracing meritorious naval officers tln-ough prejudice or caprice ; as sliown in 
the blundering mismanagement of our foreign relations. 

14. Ilierefore, to remedy existing evils, and prevent the disastrous consequences other- 
wise resulting tlunefrom, we wouUl build up the "American party" upon the principles 
hereinbefore stated, eschewing all sectional questions, and imiting upon tliose purely na- 
tional, and admitting into said party all Ameiican citizens (referred to in third, fourth, 
and fifth sections,) who openly avow the principles and opinions heretofore expressed, and 
who will subscribe tlieir names to this platform ; provided, nevertheless, that a majority 
of those meml)ers present at any meeting of a local council, where an applicant applies 
for niemliership in the American party, may, for any reason by them deemed sufficient, 
deny admission to sucli applicant. 

15. A free and open discussion of all political principles embraced in our platform. 



8 

Now, in the first place, it will Le observed that tliis platform studi- 
ously avoids the use of the word slavery from be«^inning to end. The 
12th section of the old platform dechired tliat it was the highest duty 
to avow their opinion upon so important a subject as slavery. 

The council of 1856 admitted no such obligation, and evidently 
sought to keep the party uncommitted on that question. 

The 12th section of the old platform insisted upon an adherence to 
and a maintenance of " existing laws upon the subject of slavery." 

The new platform only pledged its framers, in general terms, to 
the " maintenance and enforcement of all laws until said laws are de- 
clared null and void by competent judicial authority." So far as this 
refers to laws affecting slavery, it is a complete repudiation of the 
June platform, for the latter declared those laws to be final and con- 
clusive ; and by such declaration arraying the party against any at- 
tempt to make those laws the subject of litigation in the courts or of 
congressional action. 

The object of the council of June, 1855, was to put doicn agitation 
upon the subject of slavery ; the effect of the action of the council of 
1856 was to renew that agitation, by making the laws relative to 
filavery the subject of investigation. 

Besides, tlie new platform, in express terms, condemnfl the repeal 
of the Missouri compromise, and, in doing so, impliedly binds those 
who have adopted that platform to a restoration of the Missouri restric- 
tion. 

To sum up the differences in the two platforms : 1st. That of June, 
1855, regards " existing laws upon the subject of slavery as final and 
conclusive." That of February, 1856, contains no such avowal ; but, 
on the contrary, contemplates either their repeal through tlie legisla- 
tive department or their annulment by the judicial tribunals. 

2d. in June, 1855, it was declared "that Congress had no power to 
exclude any State from admission into the Union because its constitu- 
tion does or does not recognise the institution of slavery as a part of 
its social system." In February, 1856, the council passes this matter 
over, makes no such declaration, shi'inks from doing that which the 
South had a right to expect, and thus tails to afford any guarantee of 
the safe action of the x^'i-rty in the future. 

3d. The first platform declares " that Congress ought not to legis- 
late upon the subject of slavery within the Territories of the United 
States, and that any interference by Congress with slavery as it exists 
in the District of Columbia would be a violation of the spii'it and in- 
tentions of the compact by which the State of Maryland ceded the Dis- 
trict to the United States, and a breach of the national faith." 

The last platform contains no such avowal ; neither approves nor 
condemns further legislation by Congress upon the subject of slavery 
in the Territories, nor denounces any interference witb slavery in the 
District of Columbia. 

4th. In the most unmistakable terms it deprecates the repeal of the 
Missouri compromise, which repeal was sanctioned by the platform of 
June, 1855. 

Well, sir, we have seen by his letter of May last that Mr. Fillmore 
adopts a platform that takes from the party all claim to nationality, 



and releases it from its former pledges to abide by and maintain laws 
that are all-essential to the rights of the South, the equality of States, 
and the peace of tbe Union. 

But altliou<:;:h I regarded the sentiments expressed in that letter as 
fully exonerating me from any obligation to support Mr. Fillmore, I 
yet determined to await his return to the United States, and see what 
course he should take after he had an o]iportuuity of learning pre- 
cisely the condition of affairs, and the real position of the party. 

After his return, and on his journey from New Yoi'k to his home, 
he made several speeches explanatory of his opinions upon public 
affairs. At Rochester he is reported as follows, viz : 

"Mr. Fillmore said that he had no reason to disguise liia sentiments on the subject of 
the Misjsoiiri com]ironiise, which seemed to he the chief soin-cc of the imr.n-tnnatc agita- 
tions that now disturb the peace of the country. He said that it would be recollected 
when he came into the administration the country was agitated from centre to circum- 
ference with the exciting subject of slavery. This question was then forced upon the 
country by the; ac<iuisiti()u of new territories, and he feared that the eloquent address of 
the chairman gave him more credit for the settlement of that question tiian he was en- 
titled to, but not more, however, than he would have deserved had his power equalled 
his desire. But the truth was, that many noble patriots, whigs and democrats, in both 
houses of Congress, rallied around and sustained the administration at this trying time, 
and to them was chicll}- due the merit of settling this exciting controversy. 

"Those measures usually called the compromise measures of 1850, (he continued,) were 
not in all respects what I would have desired, but they were the best that could be ob- 
tained after a protracted discussion of this subject, which shook this republic from its 
centre to its circumference, and I felt bound to give them my official ai^jnoval. Not only 
this, but perceiving there was a di.sposition to renew the agitation. I took the responsi- 
bility of declaring, in substance, in my annual message, that I regarded these measiires as 
a 'final settlement' of this question, and that the laws thus passed ought to be main- 
tained until time and experience should demonstrate the necessity of modification or 
repeal. I then thought that this exciting subject was at an end, and that there would be 
no further occasion to introduce it into the legislation of Congress. 

"Territorial governments had been provided for all the territory except that covered 
by the Missouri compromise, and I had no suspicion that that was to be disturbed. I have 
no hesitation in saying — what most of you know' already — that I was decidedly opposed 
to the disturbance of that compromise. Good faith, as well as the peace of the country, 
seemed to me to reciuiro that a compromise which had stood for more than thirty years 
should not be wantonly disturbed. Tliese were my sentiments then, fully and fearlessly 
expressed, verbally and in writing, to all my friends, North and South, who soliiited my 
opinion. 

"Tliis repeal seems to have been a Pandora's box, out of which issued all the evils 
which now afflict the country, without scarcely leaving hope behind," &c. 

Now, sir, take this language, weigh it, strain after a meaning to 
suit your party purpose as an American, northern or southern, ex- 
amine it with all the anxiety of a partisan who hopes to obtain from 
them new strength for his candidate — I say, examine it as you will, it 
must be considered as a decided condemnation of the repeal of the 
Missouri restriction. He speaks of the compromise of 1850 — he tells 
us what was then the condition of the country, and the inducements 
which persuaded him to lend his sanction to that series of compromise 
measures. He then goes on to speak of the excitement prevailing at 
this time in consequence of the agitation of the slavery question. He 
addresses his hearers in an a])oiogetic tone of his endorscMucnt of the 
compromise measures of 1850. He refers to the Nebraska and Kan- 
sas act as a " Pandora's box" — as reopening the slavery agitation. 
He also states that the compromise of 1850 did not embrace the ter- 
ritory covered by the Missouri restriction, and that he had no suspicion 



10 

that the latter would be disturbed, and that he was decidedly opposed 
to its rejjcal. 

AVcIl, just liero I call the attention of the committee to this portion of 
his language, because it is most significant, and perhaps lias had aft 
much or more than anything else to do in forming ray judgment as to 
his position. He says that he regarded the compromise of 1850 as a 
complete settlement so far as applied to the territory not covered by 
the Missouri restriction ; Or, in other words, that, in his judgment, 
the act of 1820 applied to territory not covered by the compromise 
measures of 1850. Now, sir, see how this is. It cannot be success- 
fully denied that the Missouri compromise was in fact superseded by 
that of 1850. We know that a large portion of Utah Territory lies 
north of the parallel of 36° 30' ; that a large portion of the Territory 
of New Mexico lies north of 36° 30' ; you will find that a considerable 
portion of the territory just below the southern boundary line of Kan- 
sas, witliin the Louisiana purchase, and north of 36° 30', is owned by 
the Indians ; and that, under acts of Congress and certain treaties with 
the Indians, slavery has been introduced, and still exists therein. It 
is thus apparent that the Territorial bills of Utah and New Mexico em- 
braced territory covered by the Missouri compromise, and that, as 
those bills did not contain the slavery restriction in the compromise 
of 1820, it was clearly abrogated. That not only is this so, but that 
the treaties witli the Indians and the acts of Congress referred to, 
authorizing the introduction of slavery, had, long anterior to 1850, 
erased the line of 1820. 

How, tlien, I ask, can Mr. Fillmore, with his knowledge of the 
stipulations and effect of our treaties with the Indians, and the acts 
of Congress relative to them — how can he, in the face of his approval 
of the Territorial bills of New Mexico and Utah, contend that the 
Missouri compromise was unaffected by them ? They included terri- 
tory embraced within that compromise ; they were acts subsequently 
passed, and were, in s})irit and substance, inconsistent with the act of 
1820. According to all rules of construction, the slavery-restricting 
clause of that act was repealed. 

This much in reference to the platform upon which Mr. Fillmore 
has placed himself, and the declarations of his opinions that he has 
lately made in his speeches. 

They, in themselves, afford a sufficient guide to an}' southern man 
who wishes to do right, who is disposed to rise above party obliga- 
tions, and who, in his watchfulness of the rights and interests of his 
section, pays no heed to personal consequences. 

But, sir, there are other matters to be considered in examining Mr. 
Fillmore's claims to our support. 

In these times of juirty platlbrms ; in these times, when leading 
men are made out of miserably small material ; in these times, when 
we have looming up before the public eye no man of real large pro- 
portions ; in these times, when every man is constrained to form his 
own o])inions because there is no great directing intellect which all 
can follow — I say, in these times it is well for us not only to look at 
the man himself who claims our suffrage, but also to look at those 
who follow and support him. 1 propose to subject Mr. Fillmore to 



11 

that test. Why, sir, what do we see? If I mistake not, there are 
hut two non-shivehohliug States in which Mr. Fillmore has an electo- 
ral ticket, and in one of these (Indiana) Mr. Dunn, a memher of this 
House, and who has not only attempted at this session to have the 
Missouri line restored, but who has over and over again declared that 
he never would consent to any new slave State coming into the Union, 
has been ap.pointed a Fillmore elector. 

The failure to organize electoral tickets in the free States must be 
regarded as significant evidence that a very large portion of the Know- 
Nothing party in those States has been sunk into the dirty pool of 
Black Re[)ublicanisra. It is known that in the State of IMassachusetts, 
and in various other States, there have been ruptures in American 
njeetings, and that in every instance where a demonstration was 
sought to be made in iivor of Mr. Fillmore as the party nominee a 
breach took place. 

Again, sir, what do we see here ? On this very floor, within this 
House, we have seen more than once every northern supporter of Mr. 
Fillmore, with one exception, and he a southern-born man, voting to 
restore the Missouri compromise. 

Mr. BOWIE. AVho is the exception? ^ 

Mr. WALKER. The gentleman from New York, [Mr. Valk.] If 
I am wrong I hope I will be corrected. What am I to think of such 
allies as these? I believe, and so do the whole body of my people, 
that the Missouri restriction was unconstitutional ; that it was a severe 
blow at State equality. It was submitted to by the South, but never 
had been abided by by the North. Afterwards, sir, this restriction 
was removed, and we were in theory restored to our rights and our 
equality. You know full well — I say it in no boasting spirit, because 
alter the peo})le in my own section in 1850 succumbed to mere party 
dictation, and yielded to this miserable compromise policy which has 
so long interfered with the prosperity of the South, I am the last man 
disposed to speak boastfully of my section ; but I think I may say 
this — and you will agree with me — that the restoration of the Mis- 
souri restriction could never be acquiesced in by the South, and that 
no party there would support it ; that not a single man holding alle- 
giance to -any single State government south would ever dream of 
submitting to it. 

Well, with all this knowledge in my own mind; with the strong 
conviction that the repeal of that restriction was all right and proper 
in itselt^-that it merely restored us to what had always belonged to 
us, and which we had tem])orarily lost by a bad policy ; I ask you 
with what propriety can I come forward and support men for office 
whose friends, upon this floor and elsewhere, indicate their purpose 
to restore the Missouri restriction ? 

Again : assuming this to be their policy; suppose that, during the 
next presidential term, Mr. Fillmore should hold that high station ; 
suppose tliere should be sufficient power in the two houses to aflect 
that measure, what would be his action ? In 1848, it will be remem- 
bered by the committee, and by the country, that Mr. Fillmore took 
this ground upon the veto power — that he would only interfere where 
there is a plain violation of the constitution, or where there is a man- 



12 

ifest informality in the enactment. That was the prevalent doctrine 
of his party at that time. Well, sir, when he tells us in his speeches 
that the repeal of the Missouri compromise was an "act of had 
faith," when in what he has said and written we are warranted in 
supposing tliat he helieves tliat the Missouri restriction was constitu- 
tional, I ask my American friends upon this floor, if they can venture 
to assure the country that in such an event Mr. Fillmore would with- 
hold from it his sanction ? 

These are grave questions; they arc questions which jise ahove 
party necessities ; they are questions which address tlieniselves to the 
minds of thinking and reasoning men — men who are not disposed to 
he led away by mere party bias — men covetous of their own ])ersonaI 
character and dignity, and covetous of preserving the dignity and 
equality of their States. 

Mr. ALLISON. Will the gentleman permit me to propound to 
him a question at this point ? I would like to know wliether the gen- 
tleman from Alabama considers it a sufficient cause for a dissolution 
of the Union should the elections which are about to be had tli rough- 
out the country decide that point in sending a majority to this House 
and to the Senate, if it were possible, that would vote in favor of re- 
storing the Missouri compromise ? 

Mr. WALKER. I will answer the gentleman that (juestion in this 
wise. In the great struggle in 1850, I took the ground in my own 
State, tliat, in my judgment, this Union — all glorious as it had been, 
the object of my love and reverence, filled as I was with the thoughts 
of the great deeds of the men who gave it to us, looking upon it as of 
only less value than the principles which gave it being — I said then, 
that rather than submit to an unjust compromise I would see the 
Union shivered into fragments. And I say now — though I am no dis- 
Tinionist — that valuing my own rights, and, I trust, })i'operly regard- 
ing the rights of others — yet, I say now, in all calmness and sol- 
emnness, to northern gentlemen, that, in my judgment, if the restric- 
tion referred to by the gentleman should be renewed upon tlie South — 
if that is to be the finale of this fierce sectional strife — it would lead 
to a disseverance of the Union. I say, further, that in the consum- 
mation of the event the gentleman has supposed, if my voice had po- 
tency, it should ring from every hill-top and every vale in the South. 
I would light the beacon-fires of revolt on every southern stream, and, 
if need be, cut with the sword the bonds that linked us with oppress- 
ors. Yet, in saying this, I would invoke Heaven to turn that dark 
day away from us. I would not only live in peace, but cultivate, so 
far as we can, fraternal concord and harmony. But that can only be 
achieved, it can only be preserved, by a determination upon all sides 
to award to each State its full equality, and to the citizens of each 
State full and perfect equality, one with the other. Governments are 
not worth living for or fighting for unless the great objects of their 
creation are cai-ried out, and with us equality is the leading, funda- 
mental idea. The States must not be shorn of their sovereignty, nor 
their citizens abridged in their rights. 

But, sir, to return to the presidential election. From what I have 
said, it will be seen that I cannot justify myself in voting for Mr. 



13; 

Fillmore. What am I to do ? Where am I to ^o? I will answer 
the question. I shall not surrender any of what I conceive to be the 
great, leading, fundamental ideas of the American i)arty. I stand 
now, on tluit subject, wliere I stood a year ago. I make no surrender 
of wliat 1 believe to be tlie wise purposes of tliat Jiarty. But, sir, for 
the time being, I must liold these things in abeyance. I must let 
them bide tlieir time, trusting that by the force and power of their 
own truth they will make themselves manifest in the settled policy of 
the country hereafter. I am one of those who believe that no man 
has a right to abstain from casting bis vote, esjiecially in such times 
as these. I look upon this thing of suftVase, wliich is of legislative 
origin, and which, once given, is a right, as imposing a duty upon 
the recipient always to cast his suffrage. A man cannot hold liimself 
neutral in such times as these. Then^ sir, where am I to go, and what 
am I to do ? The committee will observe that in all that I have said 
of Mr. Fillmore, I am speaking of him as he now stands. I judge of 
no public num in this country by his antecedents ; it is not only a fool- 
ish but an unjust and unsafe mode of testing his fitness for office. I 
care not what Mr. Fillmore's opinions were in 1838. I take him as 
he stands, and I take his competitors as they stand now. lie is a man 
of high jjersonal character ; a man whose integrity is beyond question ; 
a man who has worth of his own. Therefore, sir, I give him full 
credit for honesty in his professions. 

Well, stir, who is the democratic nominee? If I were to judge 
either of tliese two men by the past, I should say, and say most 
truthfully, that they were both distasteful to me. I could put my 
finger on both of their records and find objectionable points. But, sir, 
when I come to ask myself the question, which of these two men (for 
the choice is necessarily limited to them) I must take, I answer it ia 
thiswise: In the first place, the platform on which Mr. Buchanan 
stands, verbose and unnecessarily long as it is, is far more in accord- 
ance with my own opinions and I'eelings than that on which Mr. Fill- 
more stands. I take it, sir, that his party is more fully committed at 
this time to those principles and that policy which would secure the 
rights of all sections than any other paity in the country. 

Mr. Buchanan's character and public services have been such as to 
afford some ground or belief to the country, at least, that he will not 
prove false to his professions. He has bound himself firmly by the 
party platform. That platform, in unmistakable terms, acknowledges 
the right of all the States of this Union, and not only of the States in 
their present organized government, but it recognises their, so to 
speak, prospective riglit. It recognises their equality of rights in the 
Territories, and pledges the party to the admission of new slave 
States. In these resi)ects it comes up to the demands of the South. 
Therefore, sir, taking these two gentlemen from their ])resent stand- 
points, looking at the conduct and principles of their respective sup- 
porters — in view of the fact that the real contest is between JMr. Bu- 
chanan and the Black Ftepublican nominee, and that, therefore, I 
should not, as a southern man, witlihold a vote from that candidate 
■who can bring most strength against one whose success would be dis- 
astrous to those I represent, and fatal to the Union — 1 find that I 



14 

must cut myself loose from party associatious, and cast my vote wliere 
in my judj^Tnent it is my duty to cast it, and that is for Mr. I'uchanan. 

I think I may say, Mr. Chairman, without fear of contradiction, 
that, since I have been a member of this House, there has been no 
occasion where — whenever I could prove my attachment to what I 
helieve to be the leading idea of the policy of the American party — I 
was at all found lacking in manifesting my desire to carry out their 
policy ; but, sir, I stand not here as a partisan. I claim the right to 
ally myself, for the time being, witli that party which I myself regard 
as the most conservative. I trust to preserve my own individuality 
in going with this or with that party, according to the dictates of my 
own judgment. I neither throw aside the party term of " American" 
nor take up the party term of " democrat." I simpl}^ stand — I fear 
I may say so — alone^ somewhat of an Ishraaelite. Perhaps it may be 
so in my own district. Were I covetous of a longer service in this 
hall, I feel assured that all I would have to do to attain that end 
would be to take in my hand the Fillmore banner, and canvass my 
district. But it I know myself, Mr. Chairman, I cannot be governed 
])y any such personal ambition. I must do what I conceive to be my 
duty, not merely as a southern man, but a duty enjoined upon me by 
the allegiance I owe to the great organic law. I trust that in taking 
the course I have pointed out for myself to-night, I am governed by 
suggestions of a higher patriotism than that which generally rules 
parties. I trust that, no matter how this may end — whether I am 
borne down by the overwhelming tide of party wrath, or whether, 
from the very fact of my own independence, I may be allowed to pre- 
serve my own humble way — in any event, the charge will not be laid 
at my door that I have been either recreant to my own sectional 
duties, forgetful of my own personal respect, regardless of the rights 
of any portion of our confederacy, or that I ever turned my back upon 
the claim which the constitution has upon my allegiance. 

Mr. Chairman, we have heard much to-night from the gentleman 
from Tennessee, (Mr. Ready,) on the subject of disunion. Time was, 
sir, when that word grated on an American ear. Time was when no 
man allowed himself to weigh or debate the value of the Union. Time 
was when the Massachusetts man and the Louisiana man acknowl- 
edged the sovereignty of their respective States. Time was when the 
law was obeyed throughout the length and breadth of this land — when 
every man, whether living North or South, yielded a ready obedience 
to the enactments of his State legislature, and, above all, when no 
man dreamed of treason to the constitution of the United States. 
These times have passed away ; and we now present before the world 
the spectacle of a divided and broken people — a people swayed by sec- 
tional hate, having no thoughts in common — a people not cut up 
merely by geographical lines, hut a people sundered by greater and 
more imi)as.sal)Ie barriers — a people having no commqji affection — a 
people acknowledging no mutuality of obligations — a ])eople engaged 
in a fierce sectional strife, and seemingly noJ; caring whether it ends 
in disunion or in the subjugation of One section of the Union to 
another. Sir, these are, indeed; lamentable times. Is there no 
repiedy? 1 confess that I see none, unless it is to be found in indi- 



15 

vidiial thought and individual action. Parties have ceased to be effi- 
cacious for any general good. Parties are banded together merely to 
carry out some party object. They are no longer governed by any 
high motive. That purity and integrity which formerly character- 
ized them has long since ceased to exist. It seems to me, as I have 
said, tliat if any remedy is left it is to*be found in individual action. 
Men must recall the lessons of their hoyliood, tlieir early lessons of 
love and allection for the conslitutional Union — the sense of constitu- 
tional duty must be their thoughts by day and their dreams by night — 
they must carry themselves back to the wells of our early hi 'tory, and 
draw therefrom fresh draughts of patriotism. 

Mr. Cliairman, I have spoken very discursively, very ramblingly, 
because I have not had time previously to arrange my thouglits. But 
I trust that I have with sufHcient clearness stated the reasons that in- 
fluenced my action. In fixing upon my line of conduct, I have acted 
as in ray opinion every man coming from my section should — a sectiou 
linked as it is for weal or for woe with the institution of slavery ; an in- 
stitution forming, as it were, the very life-blood of our State govern- 
ments, and to defend which is our most solemn duty. 



APPENDIX 



To the American party of the First Congressional District of Alabama. 

I beg you to read the foregoing speech, in which my reasons for not 
supporting Mr. Fillmore are given. As I was elected chiefly by your 
votes to the seat I hold in Congress, I leel it due to you to say that if 
the course I have prescribed for myself in the Presidential election 
renders me, in your judgment, unfit to further represent you, I hold 
myself ready to resign whenever you may meet in county conventions 
and express a desire that I should do so. It is only through such 
assemblages that I could ascertain with any certainty your wishes. 
Thanking you for the confidence you have heretofore reposed in me, I 
am, respectfully, yours, &c., 

PEBCY WALKER. 

Washington, Angus: 7, 185G. 



V46 



f-» 







."^vP 















V^ 



^vn 



•^ 



*^ 






'^V-'S^" 



':j^^ 






fU-o^ 


-oi> 







*,•' *■*''% °^i%*':' 



A^-V. 



,-.^' 






.r.:i> ^. 



V 






^. 



.^^ 









r. 






V 









(■^ 


0^ 


." '^^ 


e--* 


<=>^ 


v--'^-- 




* "^ * 


<^^ 












.^^ .-', <^ 




^^ .«-.. r?-.!-,' - 


^O 


/ 




>P 


-r, 








^^ 


r>^ 














^oV" 






^^r^. 






V 







;^^ 



o^ 



'^o.-i'^ 



:>' 






-^^0^ 

.^^°- 



c 



m 



